The University of Michigan last week issued a press release congratulating “U-M researchers involved in the Nobel-winning effort.” The list of academics gives an interesting insight into just how incestuous the IPCC and the green political movement have become.
Of the eight U-M researchers involved in the Nobel-winning IPCC reports, two have been directly employed by Gore while two others are not climate scientists but political scientists.
Dr. Rosina Bierbaum, dean of U-M’s Natural Resources and Environment department, joined the school after leaving the Clinton Administration – where she had served as one of the veep’s top science aides and chaired U.S. delegations to the IPCC.
A true believer, Bierbaum calls Gore a “master communicator” despite the numerous documented exaggerations in “An Inconvenient Truth.”
“He has honed that message in a way that many scientists are jealous of,” she says. When Gore spoke at U-M in 2005, Bierbaum introduced him to students as an “environmental visionary. Where there is no vision, people perish.”
Joining Bierbaum as a Gore ally is U-M Professor Henry Pollack, a geologist. He serves as a member of Gore’s Climate Project, an ongoing effort to train volunteers so they can proselytize the message of Gore’s film.
Another U-M researcher is atmospheric scientist Joyce Penner who sounds more activist than scientist in this 2004 interview with Reuters: “You hope that somehow people will understand that we have got to do something now. Some people get it – some people are driving hybrids. But there is a problem with the American public.” Two of Penner’s assistants and atmospheric scientists Natalia Andronova also contributed to the IPCC.
Then there are political scientists Detlaf Sprinz and Maria Carmen Lemos. Lemos, the more prominent of the two, is noted for writings like “A Greener Revolution in the Making? Environmental Governance in the 21st Century,” which accept Gore’s thesis that the globe is in imminent peril from warming and recommends international government models to fight them.
This cozy cocoon of academics suggests not so much a broad scientific endeavor as a club of leftist academics – not dissimilar from an academia that embraced trendy notions of world socialism in the 20th